For Scottish discussion about British Newsletter/Bristol AGM

[AntonH]

[AntonH]

[blackbear]

Hello AntonH

You state:

"With holocaust revisionist I mean Nick Koellerstrom, and I base that harsh judgement solely by following the discussion about him that has been held on this forum. (To be honest, hes promoted on 911action.org, which is linked from the 911truthcampaing-site)."

Is he.?....The following posted ..June 5....2007

ETERNAL WAR AND FALSE FLAG TERROR..by Nicholas Kollerstrom, PhD

We must stress the idea, unfamiliar and suppressed as it is, that the vast majority of international terrorism conducted on a spectacular scale is indeed state-sponsored terrorism.’ Webster Tarpley[1]

There now exists a main sequence of New - Millenium False-flag terror events, as follows:

Table 1: False Flag Terror
11/ 9/2001 New york
12/10/2002 Bali
20/11/2003 Istanbul
11/ 3/2004 Madrid
7/ 7/2005 London[2]
11/ 7/2006 Mumbai

- all having alleged Muslim perpetrators..........

It looks like a worthwhile read.

How come the dancers knew the time of the show............

[gareth]

[paul wright]

This infighting is plain ridiculous
Stefan felt the need to withdraw himself from the "sister site" to this due to peer pressure and ridicule from WAC comrades. Yet the predecessor to the sister, the WY forum, had consistently promoted and praised WAC activities. And the sister shows no signs of controversy on this topic
The rigorous and antagonistic 9/11 mo theory debate is completely ridiculous, other than examination of the motivation of either "side", and continually wearying
Give them equal footing and see what motivation might underly either perception and then move on

[AntonH]

gareth:

Yes, on that thread you can read clearly the comments from last month. In the same time, you're also sending me a pm telling me that you're hoping to get leaflets done and will let me know, then pulls it off. Even with a video of your demonstration, I call it rather impotent. Don't worry, you're free to do what you want, BUT it's a pity the way you have successfully weakened the 911 truth movement in order to do it...

blackbear:

As stated, I've only made my opinion from what I've read on this forum, and don't want to stress it any further. From what you're quoting, I'd rather read Synthetic Terror instead. And I know that I would not like to be in the same room as NK, that is my personal opinion.

[paul wright]

[xmasdale]

[kbo234]

[xmasdale]

[xmasdale]

[ian neal]

[xmasdale]

Agreed Ian!

It's a good quote. I find it a little difficult to read on that site so I reproduce it here:

Those of us who act and who attempt to do things for others or for the world without deepening our own self-understanding, freedom, integrity and capacity to love, will not have anything to give to others. We will communicate to them nothing but the contagion of our obsessions, our agressivity, our ego-centred ambitions and our delusions about ends and means.

I see Merton's mother was a Quaker. Here's a Quaker quotation which I think is also relevant. It may be a bit godly for some of our supporters, but I think many will find sound advice within it, even if they can't stomach the godly bits.

Do you respect that of God in everyone though it may be expressed in unfamiliar ways or be difficult to discern? Each of us has a particular experience of God and each must find the way to be true to it. When words are strange or disturbing to you, try to sense where they come from and what has nourished the lives of others. Listen patiently and seek the truth which other people's opinions may contain for you. Avoid hurtful criticism and provocative language. Do not allow the strength of your convictions to betray you into making statements or allegations that are unfair or untrue. Think it possible that you may be mistaken. - Quaker Advices and Queries Number 17

Some people may find it helpful to think of "that of God in everyone" as the equivalent of "each person's highest ideals". We all have them.

Noel

[paul wright]

[kbo234]

[Keith Mothersson]

I don't mean to hijack this thread onto one aspect, but I have known Nick for many years through campaigning against the illegality of nuclear weapons, in the precursor network to the Institute for Law and Peace, (now Institute for Law Accountability and Peace), which affirms the central value of civilian and non-combatant immnity from attack - which is what concerns us also if 2,700 plus folk get wasted in the Manhattan Murders.

He has had a fine record of combining research and activism, e.g. helped in the Nuclear Weapons Tribunal and central to the Belgrano Inquiry in the eighties, has edited a Russell Press book editing the legal advice concedrning the Illegality of the Iraq invasion.

Like me, like us all of us , he may occasionally reach conclusions which are coloured by personal agendas, but in general he has been a good friend to me and I have never felt that he was a hater, least of all an obsessive anti-semite.

He has acknowleged that the Jewish people(s) suffered huge blows before and during WW2, mainly at the hands of the Nazis or their accomplices, which you could call a Holocaust.

In my own work on non-combatant immunity I came across David Irving's book on Dresden which gave a figure of 135,000 dead - which I believed for some time until I read Goetz Bergander's Dresden Im Luftkrieg, which made me realise that I had probably bought a figure inflated by Nazi/German nationalist concerns to have something to put into the balance against the warcrimes Germany stood accused of by the West (and Russia). Until I went deeper into the scholarly material, I too could have been accused of naively buying a neonazi myth, including some associated tropes such as painting slightly too rosy a picture of Hitler's position in the airwar with Churchill. (Just because Churchill was all out for Night-time Area/City Bombing and Hitler offered a night-bombing pact, doesn't mean that the Nazis didn't use terror-bombing when they had the opportunity, e.g. Guernika.)

It was my acute awareness of the war crimes of the British State, which predisposed me to this mistake. The same thing happened - though I got through it faster - when I read Other Losses by James Bacque, which alleged a million German POWs died in the postwar months in the POW camps of the Western Allies. Luckily a historian friend was able to point me to a good critique.

I see Bacgue is still going strong, and I haven't read his counter-refutations (debunking the debunkers?) but I think his figure is much exaggerated.

In the last couple of years, I have become aware of just how many lines of critique exist of the Holocaust Myth - which was also an exterminist reality for so many Jews, of course. Although I do not think that Jewish writers like Primo Levy - whose work I hugely admire - are dupes and liars, I do think that there are many strange anomalies in accounts, exaggerations have flourished in some quarters, and of course we would all agree that the truth of Nazi work-em-to-death/extermination camps has been pressed into service to give Zionists a free hand to build a racist State and conduct ethnic cleansing in Palestine.

Many of these anomalies have doubtless been cleared up somewhere - but sometimes the clearer-uppers have their own agenda (viz Conspiracy Files!) so this is very contested territory and we should all be careful to check out possible refutations and rival websites and scholarly papers, etc before rushing in, otherwise we could find ourselves out of our depths.

Of course in the normal scheme of things it is fair enough to present one's current undrstanding in the confidence that others who know that we have gotten some bits wrong will be able to come forward and correct us - then we change our view and move on.

But because of the pain/trauma suffered by the victims of anti-semitism, and the danger (such as it is) of neo-nazis trying to get their show back on the road by reviving anti-semitism as a political force, coupled with the way Zionists have used that pain/exaggerated that danger to help ensure a free pass for Israel and a taboo on questioning any bit of what they and their Christian Zionist/US Imperialist allies have elevated into a strategic World Myth, then questioning important aspects of the Holocaust is not the same as scholarly discussion about other matters - one is bound to get jumped on as a heretic, treated as a social leper.

I would be prepared to suffer that contumely along with Nick if i was sure he is right about the Auschwitz gas chambers issue. But I don't know enough chemistry to judge his papers. From two other Chemistry studies which I have read - or skimmed, not really understanding them - [one supplied by the good dogsmilk, thanks!] , my sense is that Nick may have gotten out of his depths. I think he was impressed by the logic of two particular revisionist studies (Leuchter and Rudolf] focussed on the very complex Chemistry of the Auschwitz 'gas chambers' [delousing chambers versus human extermination] , but stuck his neck out behind them when he hadn't really checked out what mainstream refutations/replies existed.

Ideally he shouldn't be persecuted for his mistakes, rather he should have his mistakes - or possible/probable mistakes - drawn to his attention with the same care that we would all like to be corrected when we have made a mistake or sequence of mistakes. And if he agrees that he may have been mistaken, then he can let us know when he is ready along with any reflections on the ordinary human vulnerabilites [which we all share and at times act on and act out] which may have coloured his judgments (e.g. once a tabu is instituted socially, it can lead us sceptics to an 'amplification of deviance' phenomenon, where we forget to be sceptical about the so-called sceptics because we are getting high on the transgressive?).

These vulnerabilities, together with a couple of misjudgments about contacting people in connection with 7-7, led him to ignore certain political dangers, dangers which have impacted heavily on him now, and will also impact on the 7-7 movement to the extent that the BBC Conspiracy Files programme will seek to highlight his work and then link him to holocaust denial - and by association the wider truth movement(s).

I think we can cope with that and come out of it stronger. He remains my friend and I have trust that he will also come out this stronger and wiser. If Paul has had difficult experiences with Nick, I am sorry to hear that, but I shouldn't imagine that this forum is the best place to air them.

[TonyGosling]

[kbo234]

[paul wright]

[astro3]

I am shocked by Tony Gosling's rather wierd and poisonous comment:

[AntonH]

.



"The real purpose of holocaust revisionism is to make
National Socialism an acceptable political alternative again."
-The National Socialist White People's Party

The Holocaust History Project
http://www.holocaust-history.org/auschwitz/chemistry/not-the-science/



.

[kbo234]

[ian neal]

[Keith Mothersson]

Dear Kevin,
I think someone else used the 'c***' word first, but whoever it was, I don't like it. I think it is seriously sexist.

C*** is where we all come from - as shown by our belly buttons and Shiela-na-gig images.
The word for c*** in french is con.
Ignorance = in-con-naissance = lost our filial connection = real men don't know their born, can't honour Life, the sources of Life, the Mother, the
(W)hole,, Allah, God/dess, Emnptiness, whatever/whoever.

I don't like 'prick' either. Why not say (in this context): Neo-nazis (possibly being controlled by CIA, etc).

For me the Path means running out of swearwords and enemies, just infinite sadness at how we confuse, deny, damage reality. (on a good day; on a bad day I curse folk too and add more fuel to the fires).

peace and love, keith

[TonyGosling]

I for one never met Nick in the early days.
First time we nearly met was at the Jimmy Walters event at London central Friends Meeting House.

Apologies for the earlier rant.
I wonder if Nick has Theosophist (Egyptian/Isis/Osiris/Blavatsky) leanings.
Just a theory.
I read Peter Levenda's book 'Unholy Alliance'

[ian neal]

[kbo234]

[Stefan]

Sigh... this is a disapoiting and decidedly un-peaceful thread. I don't really want to partipate but since I've been mentioned in it, I feel the need to set the record straight.

Paul

I did not pull out of the sister site because of peer pressure from my friends in We Are Change UK.

I was never 'in'.

Ants asked me if I would consider moderating, I was hesitant because of the heavy "beam weaponry" which had already started up, Ants asked me to consider it as he wanted a mix of views and I did, principally through respect for Ants as a person. I never confirmed I would agree to be a moderator. When an email was sent out (or so I thought at the time) stating that the forum was run by WY Truth and We Are Change - which immensly annoyed all members of WAC.

We don't run forums and we DON'T DO BEAM WEAPONS thank you sir. I felt my dalliance with the idea of being involved had jeperodised the groups credibility and felt guilty and this seemed like a sign if I needed one that this was not for me. I confirmed that I would not be a moderator.

Anton,

You happened to show an interest on the one month that we missed our 11th month action - we aren't perfect - but it's no need to take it personally. If you'd come about any other month of the year we'd have been there.